Dassault Rafale - Variants, Characteristics, Armament and Performance

Because the 70x16 was a far more useable option than 70x30 although 70x30 still exists. 140x32 led to detection times taking far too long as that resulted in 14 bars which was now reduced to 7 bars.

1 Like

The full scan mode isn’t made to be a rapid acquisition mode, its meant to allow for maximum situational awareness by scanning the largest possible volume of sky to find the most simultaneous air contacts and then using the ESA’s ability to rapidly update every contact every 0.04s afterwards.

You use full scan at long range to build the most complete picture of the airspace possible, then focus down using the narrower scans like 30x15.75 if you have to quickly react to a target outside of radar gimbal limits.

This isnt a buff, you’re just using your radar wrong.

If thats true, then its good theyre finally fixing it.

That’s not how ESA’s work at all

1 Like

In ground RB, players often often being in a protracted short/medium range fight, the enemy can change their position while on the deck very quickly and you need to re-engage after having evaded their missiles. 140x32 was detrimental for this situation due to scanning too long. The 70x16 was also detrimental even if you knew that they were on the deck, just because they may have been outside of the horizontal scan zone. The 140x16 corrects this issue and allows for targets to be quickly detected when you know they’re on the deck but unsure exactly where they are horizontally in relation to you.

1 Like

Right, so gain a slight edge in the niche scenario where you are playing GFRB, do not see the enemy jet, and have no idea where the enemy jet is via RWR or other context clues, at the expense of losing the literal best radar search mode in the entire game. Brilliant.

I welcome the Rafale nerf, particularly if its historical like alluded to by Kishin, but pretending this is a buff is just stupid.

1 Like

I’m not one for arguing so let’s concede to your point and say that the Rafale’s radar got nerfed. Add it to another reason to why the MICA EM should get its range fixed so it can properly do BVR with some of its counterparts in the game.

5 Likes

EFT fans rejoice!

4 Likes

Tell that to gaijin. We all know AESA should scan all their vertical + horizontal volume at super fast speeds thanks to T/R modules that act as so many individual radars to allow to track several targets while continuing to scan the air but that’s not how they ccoded them.

They do, but only for targets you’ve already spotted once with the main radar scan, which is why getting your full scan mode halved is so detrimental.

The RBE2-AA radar updates all targets its already seen and have not yet left its gimbal limits every 0.04 seconds in-game.

Thats what this code is for:

Spoiler

image
image
image

F-15E, Rafale, Tornado

Does Rafale have gravity nuke capacity or just missiles btw?

missile only

1 Like

nah this is far from being a niche scenario, i too would consider it a buff tbh

Okay but then it means that their code is not working as in TWS i often lost some targets tracking despite my radar having them spotted already and the targets didn’t leave radar gimball.

Yup, from Datamine;

Thales RBE2 AESA (Rafale C): full search, full TWS:

  • period: 15.923827 → 7.9238276 sec,
  • bars: 14 → 7
3 Likes

Even just stands be useful for situational awareness when focusing on ground attack in other game modes.

If the AESA was working correctly, that is with a much faster volume scan rate, then I’d consider it a nerf. With the previous 17s scan volume for the 140x30, I much prefer having less vertical coverage with the 140x15 that can be compensated by the 70x30 pattern, especially with ESA radars being able to keep tracking outside of the scan pattern

Realised there are now boats in RB across a fair few maps, which just further amplifies the frustration of no exocet.

5 Likes

Targeting pod got increased in zoom

11 Likes

Damn is good, thanks !

Looks like they are adding digital zoom back, that’s nice

1 Like

Ambitious regarding the BAC but why not?